DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2002-065
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for 6 years
on or before his 6th active duty anniversary, November 18, 2001, to receive a Zone A selective
reenlistment bonus (SRB) in accordance with ALCOAST 127/01. He alleged that he was never
counseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that, if he had been, he would have reenlisted for
6 years. His record does not contain documentation of SRB counseling prior to his 6th anniver-
sary. Letters signed by his commanding officer and a yeoman at his unit state that he was not
timely counseled about his eligibility and that, when the error was discovered three months
later, he promptly stated that he wanted to reenlist for the bonus.
The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli-
cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not timely counseled.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to timely counseling concerning
his eligibility for an SRB on his 6th anniversary. Under COMDTINST 7220.33 and ALCOAST
127/01, he was eligible to reenlist for a Zone A SRB on the anniversary. The Board finds that he
was not timely counseled and that, if he had been, he would have reenlisted for 6 years to
receive the SRB. Accordingly, relief should be granted.
ORDER
The military record of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, shall be corrected to show that
he reenlisted for 6 years on his 6th active duty anniversary to receive a Zone A SRB as provided
under ALCOAST 127/01. Any reenlistment or extension contract he may have signed since his
6th anniversary shall be null and void. The Coast Guard shall pay him the amount due as a
result of this correction.
October 10, 2002
Date
Laura A. Aguilar
Stephen H. Barber
Angel Collaku
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: Xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx FINAL DECISION BCMR Docket No. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not timely counseled. The Board finds that he was not timely counseled and that, if he had been, he would have reenlisted to receive the SRB.
Under COMDTINST 7220.33 and ALCOAST 198/01, a member whose 6th anniversary fell between May 1 and September 30, 2001, was entitled to reenlist during October 2001 for a Zone A SRB. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not properly counseled and that if he had been, he would have waited until October 2001 to reenlist. Under ALCOAST 127/01 and the special provisions of ALCOAST...
He alleged that pursuant to Coast Guard regulations, his command should have counseled him that he could receive a Zone B SRB under ALCOAST 127/01 by reenlisting during the three months prior to January 22, 20xx, his sixth active duty anniversary. The CWO wrote that if the applicant had been aware that he could have reenlisted three months prior to his six-year anniversary, “he would receive an SRB payment, regardless of his selection to [xxxxxx xxxxxx].” The applicant also submitted a...
The Coast Guard erred when it counseled the applicant that he was eligible to receive a Zone B SRB for signing a six-year reenlistment contract on January 31, 2002. of the Personnel Manual, which show that a member’s SRB equals his monthly basic pay, multiplied by the SRB multiple authorized under the ALCOAST in effect, multiplied the number of months of service newly obligated under the contract, and divided by 12, if the appli- cant had reenlisted for four years on this 6th anniversary...
He was not eligible to receive the promised SRB because on the date his extension became operative (May 28, 2002), he had more than 6 years of active duty service. On November 29, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board correct the applicant’s record to show that he reenlisted for 3 years on his 6-year anniversary. The Board finds that the applicant was not properly counseled, and that if he had been, he would have extended his enlistment on April 20, 2000,...
He also alleged that during this time, he was away from his servicing personnel reporting unit (PERSRU) and did not receive counseling about his eligibility to reenlist for an SRB on September 17, 2001, his tenth anniversary on active duty. The applicant alleged that, had he been counseled, he would have reenlisted for six years in order to obtain a Zone B SRB under ALCOAST 198/01. [ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE] ORDER The six-month extension agreement, dated April 25, 2001 but...
He alleged that he was never counseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that, if he had, he would have reenlisted for 6 years. His record does not contain documentation of SRB counseling prior to his 10th anniversary, and a letter signed by his supervisor states that he was not counseled about his eligibility. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not properly counseled.
He alleged that he was never counseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that, if he had, he would have reenlisted for 6 years. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not timely counseled. ORDER The military record of xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, shall be corrected to show that on October 31, 2001, he reenlisted for 6 years to receive a 10th anniversary Zone B SRB as provided under...
He alleged that he was not timely counseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that, if he had been, he would have reenlisted for 6 years. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not timely counseled. The Board finds that he was not timely counseled and that, if he had been, he would have reenlisted to receive the SRB.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: XXXXXX, XXXXXX X. XXX XX XXXX, XXX FINAL DECISION BCMR Docket No. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling concerning his eligibility to reenlist on his 10th active duty anniversary to receive an SRB under ALCOAST 127/01. Accordingly, relief should be granted by correcting his record to show that he...